You are not permitted to download, save or email this image. Visit image gallery to purchase the image.
Most of the charges related to inappropriate sexual conduct at two Christmas functions in 2015 when the lawyer was based in Wellington.
The tribunal found that the conduct in all the charges relating to six separate incidents met the test of being regarded as "disgraceful or dishonourable".
The decision was released today and NZ Law Society president Tiani Epati said: "I want to acknowledge the courage of the victims and witnesses who came forward and bravely gave evidence for the National Standards Committee.
Epati said it was an "important case for the legal profession".
"The decision by the Tribunal sets a clear benchmark for the standards expected of lawyers, not only within an office environment but when attending work functions and events."
Gardner-Hopkins no longer works for Russell McVeagh.
Five of the charges related to his behaviour at the law firm's Christmas party.
"At that party, five incidents of drunken behaviour occurred with junior staff members involving tactile dancing and other physical contact."
The sixth charge related to his behaviour at another firm function held at his home.
During the tribunal hearing multiple former summer clerks testified that Gardner-Hopkins had touched them inappropriately, with one woman describing that she felt like a "piece of meat".
Another woman said she felt "extremely" distressed and "cried all weekend" after he had touched her without consent and allegedly touched her friend's breast in front of her.
When she discovered other women claimed they too had experienced misconduct she said it was "terrifying" because it made it feel like "it's inescapable".
One victim claimed it felt like he touched her breast "forever".
The tribunal said in its decision that the profession expected that "those who work with lawyers are respected and safe".
"A basic behaviour expected of lawyers towards those they work with is that they are respectful and do not abuse their position of power. There is no place for objectification of women or indeed any person, by those in the profession of law."
The tribunal said senior lawyers needed to model appropriate behaviour: "In this case that Mr Gardner-Hopkins should have been aware of the apparent power imbalance between a partner and junior staff members at a social function."
The penalty for his misconduct has yet to be determined.